I hope they avoid CF or at least make it SD capable also seeing how I have about 50 something gigs worth of SD cards and that much CF would cost a nice little chunk of change. If speed is the issue maybe they will use a faster SD slot this time meeting the newest standards.

and

Only problem with 6D is that ppl always seem to think that I am saying "sixty"

I try to stay positive, if I feel Canon doesn't make products for me I would simply turn somewhere else. I think they're doing a fantastic job in a very complex market. Many of their products have an overlapping user base stretching from almost beginners to experienced pros.

Shooting with both brands helps quell the frustration when one brand doesn't fill a need. It's not that much more expensive if you don't overlap your lenses. I shoot with two cameras anyway so why not make one of them a Nikon. Right now, I have a 5D2 and D800E and will most likely sell my D3x. Perfect companions (well, a 5D3 would make a better companion but I am waiting for the 39 MP, 46 MP, 50 MP, whatever MP monster from Canon before deciding). Canon gives me the 24-70 II, 70-200/4 IS, TSE-17 and 100L Macro and Nikon the 14-24G and 24-70G (purchased well before the fantastic 24-70 II was released) and of course high resolution with the D800E.

I try to stay positive, if I feel Canon doesn't make products for me I would simply turn somewhere else. I think they're doing a fantastic job in a very complex market. Many of their products have an overlapping user base stretching from almost beginners to experienced pros.

Shooting with both brands helps quell the frustration when one brand doesn't fill a need. It's not that much more expensive if you don't overlap your lenses. I shoot with two cameras anyway so why not make one of them a Nikon. Right now, I have a 5D2 and D800E and will most likely sell my D3x. Perfect companions (well, a 5D3 would make a better companion but I am waiting for the 39 MP, 46 MP, 50 MP, whatever MP monster from Canon before deciding). Canon gives me the 24-70 II, 70-200/4 IS, TSE-17 and 100L Macro and Nikon the 14-24G and 24-70G (purchased well before the fantastic 24-70 II was released) and of course high resolution with the D800E.

Sounds to me like a smart approach and confusing for some members on this forum and maybe on some of the Nikon forums... Im just an amateur and use only one body, 5D3. Happy so far with what I get with Canon and I would be financially retarded to change brand in my current situation . But you get the best of the two it seems.

sounds interesting... seems like new sensor, but lower maximum ISO than on 650D?

If that ISO rumor is right then Canon will be kicking themselves. I'm not buying this rumor. Can't imagine the lower lever camera (T4i) having better ISO performance than their higher counterpart. Once you get above the Rebel line the buyer is more aware of the performance spec's instead of the features list. They want better performance and not just more toys on a camera. I expect at least a 12800 ISO on the 70D and 7D II when released. If they don't make a significant IQ improvement then these two cameras will loose sales. JMO

If that ISO rumor is right then Canon will be kicking themselves. I'm not buying this rumor. Can't imagine the lower lever camera (T4i) having better ISO performance than their higher counterpart.

Good grief, it's about usable iso settings, what good would 6d-like settings do if all you get is noise? If you are so desperate for noisy pictures, just shoot @iso12800 on crop and underexpose -3ev...

... I'd be happy if Canon would end the marketing race in both the mp and iso setting category but just release sensors with more dr and 2 stops better iso than now.

If that ISO rumor is right then Canon will be kicking themselves. I'm not buying this rumor. Can't imagine the lower lever camera (T4i) having better ISO performance than their higher counterpart.

Good grief, it's about usable iso settings, what good would 6d-like settings do if all you get is noise? If you are so desperate for noisy pictures, just shoot @iso12800 on crop and underexpose -3ev...

... I'd be happy if Canon would end the marketing race in both the mp and iso setting category but just release sensors with more dr and 2 stops better iso than now.

Yea, but marketing is everything. I rarely took shots above ISO 1600, but an option of very high ISO is welcome for rare situations. But, if 70D's ISO 6400 is much better than 650D's e.g. ISO 1600, then I don't care how it's called:)

I don't think this spec can be taken seriously, because the spec for 70D/7Dmk2 a few weeks ago from a Japanese newspaper differed in both sensor resolution (24MP?) and ISO (25600?). I'd take that more seriously.

If that ISO rumor is right then Canon will be kicking themselves. I'm not buying this rumor. Can't imagine the lower lever camera (T4i) having better ISO performance than their higher counterpart.

Good grief, it's about usable iso settings, what good would 6d-like settings do if all you get is noise? If you are so desperate for noisy pictures, just shoot @iso12800 on crop and underexpose -3ev...

... I'd be happy if Canon would end the marketing race in both the mp and iso setting category but just release sensors with more dr and 2 stops better iso than now.

No need for the "Good grief" I don't recall anybody saying they were desperate for noisy pictures. Not sure where you conjured up that idea from. I clearly said they they will need to improve IQ or sales will drop. If you understood you would realize that the higher unusable max ISO rating they give will mean a higher usable ISO which means a cleaner low ISO. That is the way it works. Anytime they clean up the low end it will give them the ability to go higher. If they can go higher they will definitely use that number to boost sales. I never shoot above ISO 1600 now because of IQ and very seldom shoot above ISO 500. It would be very nice to have good clean pictures in the 1600- 3200 range for very low light wildlife shooting and super clean shots below that. Sorry if you got so touchy because I am not buying the rumor you posted. It's just rumor talk. Take a chill pill, relax and have fun. Keep in mind high mp and ISO ratings sell cameras and that is all any of these companies want, To sell products!

If you understood you would realize that the higher unusable max ISO rating they give will mean a higher usable ISO which means a cleaner low ISO. That is the way it works.

No, it doesn't, but marketing would people like to believe it does (sorry for the "good grief" though, I didn't want to offend you).

The max. selectable iso says absolutely nothing about usable or clean iso - take the 5d2->5d3->6d, the latter has the highest usable iso, but the older 5d2 has still the best (sharpest/dr-rich) low iso. And there's unfortunately no one stopping marketing from implementing a H4 mode @iso51200 for impressive tech specs, even though it's a noise generator unless downsizing to 320x200.

The max. selectable iso says absolutely nothing about usable or clean iso - take the 5d2->5d3->6d, the latter has the highest usable iso, but the older 5d2 has still the best (sharpest/dr-rich) low iso. And there's unfortunately no one stopping marketing from implementing a H4 mode @iso51200 for impressive tech specs, even though it's a noise generator unless downsizing to 320x200.

Maybe I am the one that don't understand then. The 6D and 5DIII have the same ISO range 100-25600. (Keep in mind I disregard all the H modes because they are useless to me.) You would expect the 5DIII to perform better than the 6D being that the latter is what I consider the Rebel of full frame. Now for the 5DII I can't say if if is better than the mkIII. I have no experience with any full frame but many seem to believe the mkIII is better. Can you show me where the mk ii beats the mk iii?

You would expect the 5DIII to perform better than the 6D being that the latter is what I consider the Rebel of full frame

"Better" is relative here - the 6d gains a little higher iso capability (maybe about 1/3 stop) but produces less sharp images than the 5d3, so it's about what people want from a ff sensor. To me, the 6d appears like a downgraded 5d3 sensor with some readout adjustments and forced chroma noise reduction even in lower iso modes (in higher iso modes, the 5d3 also has nr in raw).

The 5d2 has a higher dynamic range (highlight recovery) and spatial resolution (i.e. sharpness) in low iso modes, even with the little less mp count than the 5d3. This fact has been known for long, Canon changed the iso/mp/dr tradeoff to gain better high iso performance and probably less banding on the 5d3 - all these ff models basically all use the same sensor tech. Since ff is about higher iso shooting it's a smart move, but I recon most 5d3/6d owners don't really want to know anyway :-p

The best proof of this I know is a recent German 6d review one on traumflieger.de - but the differences between the 3 ff bodies are not large enough to make a decisive difference for potential buyers, but it proves the point.

You would expect the 5DIII to perform better than the 6D being that the latter is what I consider the Rebel of full frame

"Better" is relative here - the 6d gains a little higher iso capability (maybe about 1/3 stop) but produces less sharp images than the 5d3, so it's about what people want from a ff sensor. To me, the 6d appears like a downgraded 5d3 sensor with some readout adjustments and forced chroma noise reduction even in lower iso modes (in higher iso modes, the 5d3 also has nr in raw).

The 5d2 has a higher dynamic range (highlight recovery) and spatial resolution (i.e. sharpness) in low iso modes, even with the little less mp count than the 5d3. This fact has been known for long, Canon changed the iso/mp/dr tradeoff to gain better high iso performance and probably less banding on the 5d3 - all these ff models basically all use the same sensor tech. Since ff is about higher iso shooting it's a smart move, but I recon most 5d3/6d owners don't really want to know anyway :-p

The best proof of this I know is a recent German 6d review one on traumflieger.de - but the differences between the 3 ff bodies are not large enough to make a decisive difference for potential buyers, but it proves the point.

Absolute bollocks I am afraid. In my experience 5d3 files have more highlight headroom than mk2 files when processing in lightrôom.generally all round the 5d3 files are more flexable than mk2 from my experience. Do you own these cameras or are you quoting the internet?